Home > Offices > Provost/Dean of the Faculty > Tenure, Promotion & Appointment > Policy

(III.) A. REGULAR PROCEDURE

1. Recommendations: Department Procedure
   1. Throughout Section III the department shall be understood to mean those members of the department eligible to vote on the recommendation.

      The initiation of a recommendation concerning promotion normally originates in a department: all permanent and temporary members whose rank is higher than that of the person proposed shall meet and determine whether or not to recommend. Whenever a department takes the decision to consider a candidate for promotion, the candidate must be informed in ample time for outside evaluations to be secured for use in the departmental deliberations should the candidate be required to submit them or so request.

   2. The vote shall be transmitted in writing to the Committee on Tenure and Promotion. If it is unanimous it shall be communicated by the Chair in a letter containing a full statement of the reasons and a summary of the evidence for the recommendation for or against promotion.

   3. After a unanimous recommendation concerning promotion has been made by the department to the Committee on Tenure and Promotion, the Chair shall provide the candidate with a copy of the letter stating the reasons for the recommendation.

   4. Each member of the permanent instructional staff below the rank of full Professor shall be entitled to a review of his or her status by the department at least every third year.

   5. A member of the Faculty who is being considered for promotion to Assistant Professor shall have the right to require evaluation of his or her professional abilities and achievements from sources outside the College. However, outside evaluations of the scholarly and/or artistic work of a candidate for promotion to the rank of Associate or full professor shall be required as part of the review by the department and by the Committee on Tenure and Promotion. The relevant procedures are specified in III.A.1.f. and g. If such outside evaluations of the candidate's work have been secured within the two years preceding the current consideration, the solicitation of additional outside evaluations may be dispensed with if the candidate, the department and the Committee on Tenure and Promotion so agree.

   6. The candidate and the department, in separate memoranda, shall each submit to the Committee on Tenure and Promotion the names and complete addresses of four outside referees, listed in descending order of preference. The Committee shall solicit evaluations from two on each list, in the indicated order of preference, reserving the others as substitutes for any preferred referees who are unable to comment. After consultation with the candidate and the department, the Committee may also solicit additional referees. The names of those who have agreed to comment shall be communicated by the Committee to the candidate and to those members of the department eligible to vote on the candidate's promotion. All evaluations shall be made available to the Committee and said members of the department, but not the candidate, and are to remain confidential. All outside referees shall be informed of these procedures. Should any letter from an outside referee fail to arrive in time for consideration by the department or the Committee, either body may proceed to its decision without it.

   7. The material to be reviewed by outside referees shall include a copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae, prepared by the candidate. The department and the candidate shall make every effort to agree upon the scholarly and/or artistic material to be reviewed. Should the two parties be unable to agree, the Committee on Tenure and Promotion shall decide the disposition of any item in dispute.

   8. Candidates who have requested consideration for promotion shall be notified in writing of the nature of the departmental recommendation no later than December 1 of the academic year during which the recommendation is made.

2. Divided Vote:
   1. When a vote is not unanimous, each member of the department who voted or abstained shall write a confidential letter to the Committee on Tenure and Promotion stating his or her judgment. Each letter shall include reasons and evidence explaining the particular recommendation. In addition, the Chair shall provide the candidate and the Committee on Tenure and Promotion with a letter summarizing the reasons offered by various members of the department for their votes or abstentions. However, the names of these persons shall remain confidential. A person being considered for promotion shall also have the right to communicate in writing with the Committee on Tenure and Promotion.

   2. In all cases of a divided vote the Committee on Tenure and Promotion shall meet with the members of the department who voted and are available. An opportunity is thus provided for all positions and opinions to be heard first hand.

3. The letters from the Chair summarizing the reasons for the department's recommendation, whether unanimous or divided, shall not be released outside the College, except by the candidate.

4. If, after the procedures described above have been completed, the department or any member who has voted on the promotion should communicate to the Committee on Tenure and Promotion, orally or in writing, any opinion or evidence that differs substantially from those accompanying the original recommendation, then the Chair of the Committee shall send a letter to the Chair of the department and the candidate and to all members of the department who had voted summarizing the new opinion or evidence. The names of the persons who have presented such new opinion or evidence shall remain confidential. The candidate shall have reasonable opportunity to respond in writing to the Committee.

5. Recommendation: Committee on Tenure and Promotion
   1. If the Committee on Tenure and Promotion approves a departmental recommendation concerning promotion its decision shall be communicated to the Board of Trustees by the President.

   2. When the decision of the Committee is not in agreement with the recommendation of the department, a written statement of the reasons for the decision shall be given to the department Chair.